9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fzal Nadir Ali and the appellant herein asking to show cause why the car in question should not be confiscated, why penalty should not be imposed why the value of the car not be enhanced to Rs. 11,41,520/- and why the Bond executed by the appellant at the time of provisional release of the car should not be enforced. The importer i.e. Shri K.C. Mathew did not care to reply to the notice, while others did. (d) At the personal hearing the proposal to challenge the confiscation of the car was made by Shri Gade. The Commissioner found The reason why the matters have come to this pass is that the DRI could successfully establish that the car in question was imported into India in contravention of ITC Public Notice No. 202/92-97, dated 30-3-94. Import of a motor car into India of 1600 CC Engine capacity, is allowed when it is brought by a passenger returning to India. He should have used the car for atleast one year abroad. According to elusive Mathew, he purchased the car on 30-4-94 for 80,000 Dirhams at Dubai. The department of ports and customs, Dubai in their letter dated 30-12-95 (30th again) informed Shri C. Rajan, Consul (Economic), Dubai that the said car with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . I hold that the DRI s contention that the revised value of the impugned car is Rs. 11,41,520/- goes uncontested. The differential duty of Rs. 5,32,004/- is demandable under Section 28 of the Customs Act. The notice also proposes to charge interest under Section 28AA of the Customs Act. It is payable if Shri Gade does not pay the differential duty now demanded within three months of the receipt of this order. Since the year of manufacture is misdeclared, the car is liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. The consultant representing Shri Gade made a point during the course of P.H. that the department did not establish that the car was indeed manufactured in 1995. I observe that the invoice and registration paper made in Dubai are documents which cannot be relied upon. The department could establish that the car was imported into Dubai in March, 1995. The conclusion of the department that the car is made in 1995 cannot be seriously questioned in the light of this evidence. In any case nothing prevented Shri Mathew to contest this, I hold that the car is of 1995 make. His affidavit has no evidentiary value. The department proposed penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not dispute the basis of the valuation which was communicated to the notices. Therefore he holds the valuation of the car to be Rs. 11,41,520/- which goes unaccounted that was the reason to arrive at a liability to confiscation under Section 111(m). However, this valuation arrived based on the formula applicable for valuation of cars as applicable by taking the imported car being of 1995 model the following submissions were made on behalf of the appellant before the adjudicator, by reply dated June 30, 1998. Coming to the second allegation 6. that the said car is liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, on the ground that the car is of 1995 Model against 1994 declared in the Bill of Entry, the following submissions may please be appreciated by the Hon ble Commissioner : - (a) There is no evidence produced in the show cause notice other documentary or by way of statements recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 in support of the allegation that the car is of 1995 model. The allegation regarding car being of 1994 is vague unspecific and is totally nebulous. There is not even a mention about the car being of 1994 in any paras ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lp of the Bill No. 2075117. The car is proposed to be assessed 7. at a value of Rs. 11,41,520/- on the grounds that the sold car is of 1995 model and in view of my submissions, the allegation regarding car being of 1995 model remains unproved, and hence the assessment of the car at a price of Rs. 11,41,520/- also does not survive. The impugned order is silent on these vital contentions raised. The order of valuation enhancement and liability to confiscation under Section 11(m) and recovery of duty and interest therefore cannot survive, as car cannot be conclusively held to be of 1995 model/make. (f) The car cannot be conclusively determined to be of 1995 model would be confirmed by the following submissions made - The show cause notice refers to Bill No. 2075117 dated 28-5-95 and arrives at a conclusion that the said car arrived in Dubai on 23-5-95. The scrutiny of this said Bill No. 2075117 reveals as under :- The description of the goods in the bill No. 2075117 dated 28-5-95 is 602 cartons used Auto Parts and Tyres . In the said column there are some hand written markings which appear to be VHF-402 4851, V44-454 2889 LN -......(document is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
